In her New Zealand General-Election Campaign opening, August
2005, Helen Clark, who has described herself elsewhere as a woman leader
of a social democratic party, said we cannot and would not want to re-create
the New Zealand of the late 1930s to the 1960s.

“But our vision
has been to rebuild the fairness, opportunity, and security our people
knew at that time, and to add to it the dynamism, the energy, the momentum,
and the excitement which goes with being a successful nation in the 21st
century.”

DecisionMaker has highlighted ideas from her government, and from MPs
elected in 2005, on vision and national
identity. Labour Party principles say “at the core of democracy are
human rights which have, at least in our country, become inalienable”
said Labour list MP and former Party President Maryan Street in her first
speech in Parliament in 2005.

The Labour Party,
formed in 1916, is the longest established political party in New Zealand.
“During all that time Labour's vision of a more just society, where
all may live in comfort and security, has remained unchanged” says
the Party’s historical summary on its
official website.

National Party principles
are “I have the right to live my own life in my own way provided
only that this does not interfere with the rights of others. I should
be free to do so as I wish subject only to the rule of law” said
National list MP Christopher Finlayson in his first speech in Parliament
in 2005.

The 70th anniversary
of the formation of the National Party is in 2006. “It is the true
heir to the liberal and conservative traditions of New Zealand politics”
said Christopher Finlayson, who has held most senior positions in the
National Party apart from President.

Identifying party principles

This DecisionMaker briefing on political party principles responds to
the question from those teaching students about the foundations of New
Zealand politics about the differences between political parties.

In this search to
identity what some call party principles, but which others describe with
other language, DecisionMaker accentuates the information and interpretation
of participants in the Parliamentary process.

The 1997 print edition
of DecisionMaker published the then party leaders views on “What
the parties stand for”.

A decade on two of
the leaders remain the same (Helen Clark, Labour, Winston Peters, NZ First),
two lead different political parties (Jim Anderton, Progressive, Peter
Dunne, United Future), two other parties have new leaders (Don Brash,
National, Rodney Hide, ACT) and two new parties (Jeanette Fitzsimons,
Green co-leader, Tariana Turia, Pita Sharples, Maori Party co-leaders)
have entered Parliament.

Experienced Parliamentarians,
present and past, have insights some are willing to share. But this edition
draws more heavily on positions taken by new MPs in their first speeches
to Parliament in 2005 – they will help us anticipate the future.

We link to website
which record party principles.

Under the proportional
representation influence of MMP the opening positions of some parties
become influences on the shared positions of some governments –
as government arrangements respond to the electoral results.

Cabinet practice
changed during MMP to allow a party in a coalition or other government
arrangement to reflect collective responsibility on particular portfolios
for which they have government roles, and to challenge other government
policies, and to present their own “party brand” in anticipation
of future elections.

We may look at perspectives
on policies that illustrate how parties can disagree on some policies,
and agree on others. When we review one party’s statement of principle
against another, we may see what we want, or want for clarification. When
the parties’ strategists see similarity and divergence, they may
use the language, with its many meanings, to diverge or converge, depending
on the then current political threats and opportunities.

Political party websites

What do visits to political party websites show? At the end of 2005 DecisionMaker
looked at the site for each registered political party in Parliament –
readers are encouraged to make their own site visits, and, they may find
parties have changed their content as policy issues unfold. Print publications,
including party constitutions, are of course further sources that may
record what parties stand for.

New Zealand Labour party:
offer a better deal to ordinary people

The Labour
party website includes brief commitments from leader Helen Clark,
and the 2005 manifesto, “containing all of the 2005 policies”,
indexed, in 218 pages, with summaries, and earlier policies. It does not
include an integrated vision – such may be found in comments from
the party leader. Helen Clark refers to key values that underpin Labour.
In 1997 Helen Clark said in DecisionMaker “Labour’s vision
for New Zealand is summed up in our 1996 election slogan: New Heart, New
Hope, New Zealand.”
She continued: “Put simply, we will promote policies which offer
a better deal to ordinary people.”

Helen Clark gave
another insight to her view of Labour’s philosophy in past addresses
– such as to the Eighth Women’s Conference of the International
Confederation of Free Trade Unions, Melbourne, February 2003.

“I am a woman leader of a social democratic party which leads a
government. That combination of factors is hard to find anywhere else
in the world at this time. So I come to offer you my personal encouragement.
The issues the conference will discuss are important to me and my government.
We share your concern about the need to globalise equality and justice;
to build inclusive societies; to fight all forms of discrimination; and
to work for a more peaceful world.”

Jim Anderton’s Progressive party: "determination of those who have left their old societies
to make a better life for themselves and their children in the new."

Jim Anderton said in 2003 that the genuine 'progressive left' in New Zealand
politics “corresponds to some real historical and contemporary experiences
of our society and its communities since its establishment as a colonial
outpost of Europe in the mid nineteenth century”

He said wanting to implement these agendas in one form or another is what
it means to be 'on the progressive left' in New Zealand.

Jim Anderton, leader of the Progressive Party and the only MP in coalition
with Labour during the third Clark Government elected in 2005, left his
account of what is progressive on his
website
He also listed Progressive Party ambitions
* Full employment
* Free education and health care
* Support for families and those in need, leaving no one behind
* Strong, safe communities
* Investment in New Zealand
and accentuated current campaigns.
Click here for Progressive party
policy

In “What is Progressive” Jim Anderton wrote:
“The settlers who came here in increasing numbers throughout that
century (the 1800s) brought a radical dissenting and reforming tradition
with them. Many of them were Chartists, those who had been part of the
movement for reform in nineteenth century Britain.
These included many reforms we now take for granted such as Parliaments
which meet regularly, one citizen one vote, education for all, the secret
ballot in elections, and legislation to provide for democratic trade unions,
among other things.

By the turn of the nineteenth century those reforms had been mostly achieved
and we had forged an egalitarian and democratic society that writers and
political commentators such as Sydney and Beatrice Webb came from afar
to marvel at.

There was always a strand within that broad political culture of a strong
tradition of centralised community/ political initiatives which saw the
growth of a mixed economy and a clear role for the state to improve the
quality of life of its citizens. This owed something, although not exclusively,
to the socialism which was in vogue among European radicals at the time.

But it owed far more to the pioneering traditions of community co-operation
which is common to immigrant societies as they develop, and to the sense
of justice and equity which grows out of the determination of those who
have left their old societies to make a better life for themselves and
their children in the new. This is where the real origins of the 'progressive'
left in New Zealand are to be found.

By the mid twentieth century this had produced in New Zealand two major
reforming governments. The Liberals in the two decades prior to the First
World War, and Labour from the Depression to the end of the Second World
War. These governments of the centre left had developed a political agenda
which is now central to the values of many New Zealanders.
Its emphasis was on the need for a comprehensive welfare system to get
people through those ups and downs in their lives that are not of their
doing – illness, unemployment, accidents and old age. To help them
in making their way in life and taking advantage of their opportunities
– education, decent housing, and a clean environment. And above
all, the chance to work within a strategic framework of full employment
underwriting all the rest.”

Jim Anderton, in his article on what is Progressive also said “But
there has been a strategic price to pay in the sense that the pursuit
of single issues cultivated a frame of mind on the part of 'the left'
which never paused to ask what all of this added up to. There was no overall
plan of approach, just a series of things to achieve and no way to measure
the extent of that achievement because no-one seemed to be thinking about
the direction in which it was all headed.”

He says “There's nothing dramatic or spectacular about the exercise
of political power and influence in a parliamentary democracy. It's simply
a matter of sitting at the table and pressing for change small step by
small step. This, in its turn, means having a clear strategic sense of
where you are going.”

New Zealand National party:
opportunities for all New Zealanders to reach their personal goals and
dreams

The National Party
seeks a safe, prosperous and successful New Zealand that creates opportunities
for all New Zealanders to reach their personal goals and dreams.

We believe this will be achieved by building a society based on the following
values:

•
Loyalty to our country, its democratic principles and our Sovereign as
Head of State
• National and personal security
• Equal citizenship and equal opportunity
• Individual freedom and choice
• Personal responsibility
• Competitive enterprise and rewards for achievement
• Limited government
• Strong families and caring communities
• Sustainable development of our environment.

New Zealand First party:
to put New Zealand and New Zealanders first
The New
Zealand First party website includes 15 principles, the first being
“to put New Zealand and New Zealanders first”.

The Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand:
commits to the four Principles of Ecological Wisdom, Social Responsibility,
Appropriate Decision-making, and Non-Violence

The Green
Charter is “the founding document of The Green Party of Aotearoa
New Zealand”.
The Green Party accepts Te Tiriti o Waitangi as the founding document
of Aotearoa New Zealand; recognises Maori as Tangata Whenua in Aotearoa
New Zealand; and commits to the four Principles of Ecological Wisdom,
Social Responsibility, Appropriate Decision-making, and Non-Violence.
The Greens
grouped all 2005 NZ Green policies into four campaign themes: A Cleaner
Environment | A Fairer Society | Safe, Sustainable Energy | Healthy Food,
Healthy People. The site includes the A to Z list of full policy documents,
and the Policy site map with available resources for each policy.

Maori party:
driven by values that come from a Maori worldview, and believes strongly
that such values are of benefit to all who call Aotearoa home

The Maori Party says in its section on aims,
that the party “is driven by values that come from a Maori worldview,
and believes strongly that such values are of benefit to all who call
Aotearoa home. The values centre around building relationships between
Maori and the Crown, between communities, and in so doing, provide a rich
basis for development for the nation.” The document Te Tahuhu Herenga
Kaupapa contains the collection of principles from which policy is derived.

The Party says it will remain true to its belief that the kaupapa set
out in its constitution are its point of difference from other political
parties. The Party operates on the basis that:

People are its priority (hence the importance given to whaanau)

People cannot be supported without reference to the nation’s constitutional
blueprint (hence the attention to Te Tiriti o Waitangi)

People and Te Tiriti o Waitangi are pre-requisites for genuine progress
(hence the regard for the economy)

The policy approach
* Kaupapa driven not portfolio driven;
* Maori models not just western ones;
* Top of the cliff not the bottom;
* Positive strengths not negative dysfunction;
* Inventive not conventional;
* Equity based not equality based;
* Investment not expenditure focussed;
* Self determining not dependent.

The Maori party’s policy framework is based on nine kaupapa (values)
from which are derived the tikanga or policies, operating procedures and
organisational structures.

United Future party:
guarantees New Zealand stable government and commonsense policies that
benefit the New Zealand family

The United Future
party website says it is “the party that guarantees New Zealand
stable government and commonsense policies that benefit the New Zealand
family”. It spells
out policies for United Future, working with the Outdoor Recreation
party.

ACT party:
Individuals are the rightful owners of their own lives

ACT party principles
are* Individuals are the rightful owners of their own lives and therefore
have inherent freedoms and responsibilities.
* The proper purpose of government is to protect such freedoms and not
to assume such responsibilities.
Its website lists policies, and leads to pages with fuller detail.

Cross party principle themes

Party principle themes evident amongst parties elected to New Zealand’s
48th Parliament in 2005 include:
o The Labour and National parties are New Zealand’s longest established
political parties
o The formation of other parties in Parliament owes much to MPs who left
the long established parties
o Progressive party leader Jim Anderton, United Future party leader Peter
Dunne, Maori Party leader Tariana Turia are all former Labour MPs
o Act Party leader Rodney Hide campaigned to support a National Party
government; the two Act leaders who proceeded him, Richard Prebble and
Sir Roger Douglas were former Labour MPs
o NZ First party leader Winston Peters was a National MP
o Green Party former co-leader Rod Donald was a Labour Party member
o New Zealand Parliamentarians put more evident emphasis on issues and
policies rather that fully worked statements of political principle
o Some MPs define their party principles in terms of what they are for,
and what they are against
o Some MPs define their positions in terms of short term, and longer term
policies
o Some MPs support other parties on some issues
o Some MPs emphasise particular groups they represent
o MPs have varied success rates in selling their principles and policies
to their caucuses
o Opinion polling, and strategic judgment, influence at least the presentation
of principles and policies
o The values, judgments and opportunities facing party leaders sharpens
the expression and application of party principles
o The MMP system affects the ways parties advocate their principles and
policies – positions are modified to take account of the positions
of others
o MMP has transferred the contest of ideas out of a few party caucuses
to a contest in public between more party caucus representatives
o Some MPs are very positive about MMP, some have converted to it, and
some new MPs are amongst the doubters
o MPS who tend to disagree on principles tend to speak respectfully of
the individual worth of their opponents
o As New Zealand’s national identities evolve, the emphasis in the
principles and the policies change.

MPs work to influence
the ways their parties, and the Parliament, addresses policies, sometimes
reactively, sometimes proactively. They are influenced by others in their
caucuses, their parties, other parties in Parliament, and of course by
the established positions expressed by their party leadership, which in
turn reflects party history, and the environment in which politics play
out. In the democratic process they are influenced by the electors, who
over time, reject some electorate MPs and some on some party lists, and
elevate others.

The class of 2005

The MPs elected in 2005 will inevitably have an impact on principles,
policies and positions struck in and by Parliament. Their maiden speeches
are from a level playing field. As the poppies participate, so parties
are likely to change.

Labour “democracy and core human rights” advocacy

Labour list MP Maryan Street said in her first speech to Parliament that
democracy and its core human rights “are the right to participate
in elections, extended uniquely to women in New Zealand before any other
self-governing nation in the world; the right to freedom of expression;
the right to be treated equally before the law; the right of the media
to operate without interference and political coercion.”

“These are
fundamental aspects of democracy which are by no means experienced universally.
They are rights and also privileges for which wars have been fought and
lives have been lost. And the fight continues” she said.

“There are
other just as significant yardsticks of a democratic society. One is the
existence of strong trade unions, independent of employer or political
patronage, and free to affiliate with political allies or not, as they
see fit. Another is the existence of political parties, without which
political organisation and expression are unfocussed and disparate at
best and chaotic at worst. Some might consider that unfocussed political
chaos happens anyway, but I am sure, from my own experience as the President
of the Labour Party, that having political parties which come from strong
philosophical and political traditions, such as the Labour Party does,
provides citizens with something to vote for, or against, as they choose.
Having such an organised expression of political commitment enhances the
political process and allows citizens to participate intelligently and
meaningfully in it.”

“Another yardstick
of a democratic society is its treatment of minorities. This is not a
new thought. It is a truism. But in recent times, it has taken on a new
relevance in New Zealand. The shabby, slovenly thinking behind the detractors
of what is pejoratively termed “political correctness” must
be seen for the crass political opportunism that it is. Pushing people
to the margins of our society and then despising them for being there,
purportedly in the interests of the great ill-defined “mainstream”,
serves our democracy badly. All New Zealanders would be much better served
if mainstream society was seen for what it is: a loose conglomeration
of varying interests, all seeking to move forward peacefully and profitably
within the laws of the land to improve their lot, and the lot of others.

“The true measure
of the democratic state however is not in its treatment of the majority
but the respect, rights and opportunities it affords its minorities. If
any are barred from opportunities by virtue of their gender, colour, race,
religious tradition, sexuality, disability, trade union affiliation or
political beliefs, then we are not a true democracy.

“If any are
allowed to be excluded or despised by virtue of any of the characteristics
I have just listed, then our democracy is less than it should be. This
isn’t about a government telling people what to think. It is not
about saying which jokes are permissible and which are not. This is about
basic respect for others who may be different in some identifiable respect
but who seek the same law-abiding, improving quality of life in this country
that most people seek. A strong, self-confident democracy is one which
recognises, embraces and values diversity. Only a cringing, unassertive
democracy retains its power by excluding others and stripping them of
their place in it.

“A pluralist
society is stable because of its differences, not despite them. It is
the very differences between people, working together peacefully and with
respect for each other, which allow a society to remain strong and cohesive.
If there is a recognised and valued place for everyone who is law-abiding,
then everyone has a vested interest in ensuring that that society is maintained.
If people have a stake in this society by virtue of having a job, by owning
a home, or by raising their children here, they will have an interest
in preserving its security and stability. The hallmarks of a society which
excludes and marginalises people for whatever reason, are instability,
disharmony, intolerance and violence. That is not the society I seek for
our children” Maryan Street said.

Christopher Finlayson : National’s liberal tradition

National list MP Christopher Finlayson, now shadow Attorney-General, recalled
the 1947 maiden speech former National Party Prime Minister Sir John Marshall
gave as MP for the then Wellington seat of Mt Victoria. In that speech
Sir John outlined his adherence to the principles of liberalism and the
liberal tradition. Almost 60 years later, that speech reads very well
and the principles which Sir John outlined are still relevant to the National
Party today said Christopher Finlayson in his maiden speech in 2005.

“The classic
conservative has a deep suspicion of the power of the State, prefers liberty
over equality, is patriotic, believes in established institutions and
hierarchies and is sceptical about the idea of progress” said Christopher
Finlayson, a man with substantial legal experience, including Treaty of
Waitangi settlements.

“The National Party takes the best of liberalism and conservatism.
So, for example, a classical conservative government would not have pursued
the Treaty settlement policy advanced by the Bolger Administration in
the 1990’s. That great work was liberal-conservatism in action.
As Benjamin Disraeli once said, his ideal government would be made up
of Tory politicians and Whig policies.

“Some contend that conservatism and liberalism are unhappy partners
and that today the Labour Party is really the natural home of the liberal.
I disagree. The Labour Party’s philosophy is in fact opposed to
liberalism” he said.

His maiden speech considers practical application of liberal conservative
principles to what he thinks are some of the issues facing New Zealand
in the early years of the 21st Century.

Allan Peachy: I believe in freedom

Allan Peachy, National MP for the Auckland electorate of Tamaki, and educator,
told Parliament in opening his first speech there in 2005: "I believe
in freedom, in the freedom of every New Zealander, regardless of where
they were born, or how they were brought up, or what sort of house and
community they lived in, to be the very best that they can be."

Allan Peachy also
said:

"Freedom is
always eroded under socialist rule. The Government has become more intrusive,
more coercive, more meddlesome, AND less effective. It absorbs too much
of New Zealanders’ income and hampers our economy with bureaucracy
and restrictive tax rates. Most of our nation’s problems have their
cause right here – in Wellington. Our capital has become the seat
of a “nanny” system that functions for its own benefit –
increasingly insensitive to the needs of New Zealanders who pay the taxes.

….".It
troubles me that so many in this House persist in looking at the past
instead of the future. They think of people as belonging primarily to
a class or interest group, and not as individuals. They seek to explain
the problems of our nation in terms of socio-economic background, or school
decile rating, or class divisions that should not exist. In the 21st Century,
knowledge and how that knowledge is used, will determine the success of
the individual and of the nation. There can be no place for a mean-spirited
and socialist ideology which subordinates the individual to the ill-defined
greater good of the state. History will shame those who seek to impose
the crushing mediocrity of collectivism on our communities."

…" I believe
in hard work, I believe in individual responsibility, and I believe in
freedom.

New Zealand needs
leadership that offers:

* progress, not the
strangulation of initiative
* truth instead of promises that go unkept behind the excuse of MMP
* hope and optimism, not defeatism and mean-spiritedness.

"New Zealand
needs leaders who share the values that makes ours a great way of life.
It needs leadership that is independent of the forces which create our
problems – this Labour Government, the Wellington bureaucracy, the
interest groups, the trade unions and the petty self-serving arrangements
arising from MMP - including the cynical grasp for the baubles of power
by the leaders of minor parties.

"For New Zealand
to move forward there is much that must change. So let us have leaders
who share the New Zealand dream. Let us have leaders who cherish the ideals
of freedom. Let us have leadership which stops the steady erosion of those
institutions such as family, which form the foundations of our freedom
and prosperity.

"Too many New
Zealanders have grown up in families trapped by the State into welfare
dependency and its accompanying bigotry of low expectations. No New Zealander
can be truly free while they remain dependent on the welfare system for
a livelihood. No New Zealander can be free as long as the Government keeps
them trapped in the cycle of poverty and dependence that arises from being
stranded in communities where state-provided housing is poor, where criminals
are free on the streets and good New Zealanders are prisoners in their
own homes, where the streets are crime-infested and too often the schools
are struggling" Allan Peachey said.

Dr Jonathan Coleman: defined by its people, not by its Government

National electorate
MP for Northcote Dr Coleman, one of 13 medical doctors who have been New
Zealand Parliamentarians and one of three in the National caucus in the
48th Parliament said in his maiden speech in 2005 “that the real
New Zealand way is defined by its people, not by its Government.”

Dr Coleman, whose
electorate is in Auckland, said “what binds the National Members
of Parliament together is a belief that the culture that is at the very
heart of National Party values is the key to New Zealand success in the
21st century. It is the National party way; it is the true New Zealand
way.”

”The reason
for the long term success of the National Party is that those very values
which our party is founded on are the values which resonate down the generations
with every New Zealander as a guide for progress in life both for the
individual and the community.”

The value that he
believed holds the key to our future, “is the belief in reward for
competitive enterprise.

“National is
the Party whose every policy can be explained in terms of underlying philosophy,
and it is this strength and integrity of values which make me proud to
be a Member of the National Party” Dr Coleman said.

”Results must
prevail over dogma if New Zealand is to be worthy of a place as a leading
Pacific Rim nation. We must analyse what is not currently working then
set about finding the most practical and realistic solutions to serve
our people's needs. Government should serve the people, not be their master”
he said.

”While as a
doctor there is no question that one can do many fine deeds to help individuals
and communities, equally I have no doubt that it is through the political
process that greater good for one's country might be achieved.

”I come here
with no illusions about the realities of political life, but equally I
remain confident that this is an arena in which humanity, if not always
humility, might be expressed. For that is ultimately the purpose for which
every member must surely enter this house; the betterment of one's fellow
New Zealander. The philosophies may be different, but the purpose must
surely be the same” Dr Coleman said.

Dr Jackie Blue, National: breast physician campaign

National list MP Dr Blue was New Zealand's first breast physician before
entering Parliament in 2005 – and in her maiden speech made it clear
she would campaign for that branch of medicine.

Tim Groser, prioritises excellence

National list MP
Tim Groser, a NZ international trade negotiator and then senior official
of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade before entering Parliament
in 2005, said in his first speech to the House he has
o an agenda that prioritises excellence, not acceptance of mediocrity,
in our schools.

He is
o about removing the more obvious impediments that hold back our workforce
and our companies in their endeavors to create the next phase of wealth
creation.

John Hayes: I stand against unrealistic expectations

National, Wairarapa
electorate MP John Hayes, a former peace broker in the Bougainville crisis
and then senior official in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade,
said in his first speech to the Parliament he was elected to in 2005:

“I stand against
the unrealistic expectations of the United Nations committee on decolonisation
who expect a community of 1500 people subsisting on three atolls 270 miles
from Samoa to have the cash to afford their own government. The decolonization
model followed by Niue, damaged that society and was a failure. We must
not repeat the same mistakes. It is outrageous that the ten thousand Tokelauans
living in New Zealand are to be excluded from this vote.”

Hayes also said:

“I am all for
helping Niue but in doing so I am also thinking about a constituent who
needs to find $90,000 because our government won’t meet the cost
of the cancer drug she needs. I think too of the doors I knocked on while
campaigning where I met older citizens wrapped in blankets because they
could not afford to pay for electricity, or others without sleep and in
pain because they had been waiting 18 months for a hip operation.”

He spoke directly
to his former colleagues in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade:

“Before you
engage in activity on the back of taxpaying citizens please look really
carefully at the value being returned to the community. “

John Hayes’
“yardstick is a constituent in Kiripuni who earns $10.50 per hour.
Think about how difficult it is to meet the costs of bringing up and educating
a family, meeting the cost of accommodation and food, paying for holidays
and providing for retirement on this sort of income. Poor incomes set
the framework for social problems and we need to address them. “

Nicky Wagner: anguish after the Pied Piper had lured all the children
away

National List MP
Nicky Wagner, told Parliament in her first speech there in 2005 she hates
the thought that New Zealand is the birthplace, the nurturer and the educator
of a whole generation who may return that investment to another country.
“Do you remember the anguish of the people of Hamlin after the Pied
Piper had lured all the children away? We must not let that happen to
New Zealand” she told the House of Representatives.

She was clear about
a group of New Zealanders she wished to represent in Parliament. “These
people are the self-employed and owner operators of small businesses employing
less than 20 workers.”

She described them
as “those 300,000 people who work enormously long hours, often in
sub-standard conditions and cannot claim overtime, redundancy or maternity
leave. Their jobs and their incomes are totally exposed to local and global
economic shifts and their risks and responsibilities continue regardless
of ill health, or misfortune. This group includes men and woman of all
ages and all races. Many of these people are new immigrants, women with
children, and people who have been made redundant. Many have low levels
of education and all worry from day to day about their future and the
future of those that depend on them” Nicky Wagner said.

New Zealand according
to Nicky Wagner is “a wonderfully endowed, beautiful country but
we need to look after it much better”.

“Strong families
built this country but we the present generation are free riding on the
efforts of those that have gone before us. We’re not looking after
our elderly properly and we run the risk of losing the next generation
to the more productive and faster growing to economies overseas. We’re
too tough on those who are working hard to get ahead, especially the self
employed and small business owner operators and there is no incentive
for New Zealanders to invest in a smarter future as long as we are over-taxed
and under-appreciated” she said.

“I believe
that every New Zealander needs to take personal responsibility for their
own and this country’s future because no organisation, and certainly
no government can be flexible enough to manage a world where change is
the only constant, and the unexpected is the norm.

“But all is
not lost. Just as our ancestors, each and every one of them, took up the
challenge of building a better country for future generations so can we.
I’m keen……but we better get cracking! “Nicky Wagner
told Parliament.

Jo Goodhew: scorn political correctness, value
self-reliance

Jo Goodhew, National
MP for the Southern South Island Aoraki electorate said in her 2005 maiden
speech “Our children deserve to be represented by politicians who
are not here solely for the “technology of power and manipulation”.
This was Vaclav Havel’s description of undesirable politics she
said.

“These children
deserve to be represented by New Zealanders who have had to juggle work
and family, who scorn political correctness, who value self-reliance and
believe that working hard should bring personal benefits, not increased
taxation.”

Chris Auchinvole: I believe in less Government

“Benjamin Disraeli, known as the father of Conservatism, aptly said
"The greatest good you can do for another is not just share your
riches, but reveal to them their own." In his 2005 maiden speech
National list MP Chris Auchinvole, quoted Disraeli.

“This I guess,
is why I embrace the National Party philosophy enunciated by Don Brash
in the campaign - it works. That is why I believe in less Government,
and find the move towards more regulation and more proposals for distribution
of wealth by stealth, stifling, and counter-productive to a region's well-being”
Chris Auchinvole said.

He unashamedly “supports
the National Party philosophies espoused by John Key”.

Chester Borrows:
to do Justice, love kindness and to walk humbly before my God

Chester Borrows, National electorate MP for Whanganui wanted to enter
Parliament because he thought he could make a difference. “My inspiration
comes from a passage of scripture outlining the requirements of my chosen
faith, “….”

His parents “believed,
as I did for thirty years, that the Social Gospel of our Christian Faith
was best reflected politically in the policies of the Labour Party.

“My decision
to join the National Party though was initially in response to the then
Labour government removing the PEP Scheme, the then Work For the Dole
scheme of the late 1980s.

The Minister of Labour
decided to stop trying to provide work for the unemployed because of the
cost of administration - I saw this as an abdication of social responsibility

Nathan Guy: how important pastoral agriculture is to the economy.

List MP Nathan Guy, National, said in his 2005 maiden speech he support
Fonterra Chairman Henry van der Heyden’ view that “ the message
still hasn’t got across to urban New Zealanders and the Government
how important pastoral agriculture is to the economy.

Fonterra is New Zealand’s
number one company. It is also the world’s leading exporter of dairy
products and is ranked among the top 10 dairy companies in the world.
We should celebrate this, not ‘knock it’.

Nathan Guy said he
would “push hard for increased funding into pastoral research and
development, and innovation.”

Colin King: I promise my electorate that I will take the lead

National Kaikoura electorate MP Colin King said in his 2005 maiden speech
“we need to be goal setters and achievers. I promise my electorate
that I will take the lead. I will set the example in setting and achieving
goals within key areas of public interest—issues of national importance
such as health, education, care of the elderly, fairer allocation of spending
on infrastructure, reward for personal endeavour, and the care of the
environment. Those issues will be addressed in the local context for the
benefit of the whole electorate.”

David Bennett:
for tax cuts which “send the right signals and incentives”

National, Hamilton East electorate MP David Bennett, called for tax cuts
which “send the right signals and incentives” in his 2005
maiden speech.

He said New Zealanders
are struggling under an oppressive tax regime that is sending the wrong
signals.

“We should
be encouraging a strong work ethic. This enhances self-esteem and brings
respect for others. We need to give trust and choice back to the people
and not to some government redistribution policy.

“We also need
to replace the culture of welfare dependency with the path of personal
responsibility.

“The state
must ensure that we empower people not entrap them into dependence. For
at some point the entrapment will no longer be sustainable and the pain
of transition will be greater than at the point of entry” David
Bennett said.

“We need to
support and celebrate success. We need an environment that provides the
opportunities to achieve.”

Paula Bennett:
open debate about what direction we want our country to go in

List MP Paula Bennett,
one of the National Party’s part European, part Maori members said
in her first speech to Parliament in 2005 that it is not individual pieces
of legislation that have been passed recently that she rallies against.
“It is the fact that this House of Representatives does not lead
the discussion by encouraging open debate about what direction we want
our country to go in” she said.

“With women at record levels in tertiary education and in many ways
outdoing the boys academically, we seem to have come so far but there
are now questions that we need to ask. I want to be part of a government
that opens for discussion the type of society that we want to be in the
future and the role that the family plays in modern New Zealand society”
she said.

“The values that I hold true to of self responsibility, hard work
and reward for effort made it an easy decision to join the National Party.
With unemployment levels at their lowest in many years, we should also
be seeing reduced numbers of those receiving welfare. But we are not.
The number of people receiving benefits is still way too high and the
cost to taxpayers is huge. The financial costs are not what should concern
us the most. Our concern should lie with what it is doing to our culture,
and the lack of aspiration and self esteem many beneficiaries feel”
said Paula Bennett.

Craig Foss: have the courage to confront and address the hard
issues

Craig Foss, the National MP elected in 2005 for the Hawkes Bay electorate
of Tukituki said in his maiden speech he was “fearful but vigilant
of being beaten down by the faceless grey bureaucratic machine that, it
has been whispered, really run the country”.

He also said Governments
should listen carefully to taxpayers views on tax.

”The bigger
the Government the harder those workers in the private sector have to
work to counter the weight of the state. Even for our economy to stand
still, the private sector has to continue to grow” he said.

“The delivery
mechanisms for all state assistance need to be examined. This is not hard
to achieve. Like so many issues facing New Zealand, the solution will
be found if our political leaders have the courage to confront and address
the hard issues” Craig Foss told Parliament.

“The dependency
drug pushed into Maori by Labour and paid for by their votes, is killing
an entire race. That the Maori Party has emerged and flourished under
a Labour Government must be the final proof required that the Welfare
State, in its present form, has failed” Craig Foss said..

“On the Marae
at Waimarama I feel the energy, love, and perhaps a life force that is
feeding my need to understand so much more.

As I am asked, and
begin to recognise and acknowledge the place that Maori have in our culture,
I ask in return that Maori recognise that I am also rooted into and anchored
to this great land. This is my home” Craid Foss said.

Jacqui Dean: look at issues that affect all of New Zealand, not
just some

Jacqui Dean, elected as National MP for Otago in 2005, responded in her
maiden speech to Maori Party leader Dr Pita Sharples’ “passionate
challenge to Parliament to work with your party, in an open and constructive
way.” I accept your challenge” she said, and challenged him
“to look at a part of New Zealand that is very different from your
own”.

She invited him and
his party “to see what life is like for us in the Deep South, where
our population is mostly Pakeha, and where our Chinese gold mining pioneers
are also a significant part of our Southern Heritage”.

”I look forward
to working with you, and look at issues that affect all of New Zealand,
not just some. I am here for Otago, and all of New Zealand. Can you meet
THAT challenge?” she said.

Pita Sharples: work together for a better New Zealand

Dr Pita Sharples,
co-leader, Maori Party and electorate MP for Tamaki Makaurau Electorate
choose to talk in his first speech in Parliament in 2005 about beliefs
expressed by MP’s, which have served to promote a negative stereotype
about Maori and about Maori culture within the community. He did so to
clear the air “that we may build strong relationships in this house
to work together for a better New Zealand”.

“It is common
knowledge that Maori do not enjoy the same socio-economic and educational
benefits as non-Maori in this, their country of origin. It strikes me
as somewhat amazing, that half the country and probably half of this house,
actually believe that Maori are the privileged group within our society.
Cries of racial funding, gravy train, special courses, are constant within
these walls, and eagerly published by every arm of the media to promote
a negative stereotype of Maori.

“If Maori are
the privileged group, why in my electorate are Maori not living in prime
locations like Kohimarama, St. Heliers, Mission Bay, or conversely, why
are Maori concentrated inland in state housing sectors? Does privilege
mean we Maori dominate certain illnesses such as diabetes, heart disease,
asthma, glue ear and others? And that we die ten years earlier than Pakeha?
Or is our real privilege to be revealed by this countries disgusting incarceration
figures? I say disgusting because in 1980, 1 in 1000 New Zealander’s
were in jail. In the early 90’s, 1 in 800 were in jail. But today
there are 6,961 people in jail. 1 in 570 New Zealander are in jail. But
for Maori, the privileged group, 1 in 180 persons are in jail with a total
of 3481 Maori inmates.

“And I ask
this House, why are Maori being promoted so negatively by politicians,
the media, and consequently by non-thinking and redneck New Zealanders?
How can that be good for our future? Why were Maori used as a political
football in this past election campaign? Criticism of Maori cultural icons
such as the Powhiri, the Poroporoaki, Te Reo Maori, Waiata Maori, were
all prominent in election campaign speeches. In fact, the negative attacks
were so common, one might say that it is becoming too PC to continue them”
Dr Sharples said.

Te Ururoa Flavell: Maori efforts to be heard are not just in the past,
but they are of the now

Maori now have a Party that can raise these issues without fear of compromising
their party loyalty Maori Party MP Te Ururoa Flavell told Parliament in
his first speech in the House. The Waiariki electorate MP said “there
are many issues that have not been raised before. I hope to have
the opportunity to raise them. I would do so not to put Maori ahead
of any one else, but simply to ensure that the issues of justice and fair
play are exposed and debated, freely and openly by us all. I believe
it is only in that way that we will develop that true understanding of
our respective traditions and values that will enable us to move forward
as a united people, sharing common goals.”

In his first speech in Parliament in 2005 Te Ururoa Flavell acknowledged
Judge Heta Hingston as one who encouraged him to stand for Parliament,
and said “It was he who agreed that Maori could follow a process
in law in this country to determine an ownership right over the Foreshore
and Seabed.”

Te Ururoa Flavel
told Parliament he had been elected “because our people have used
every possible avenue to express our reality and live as Maori. A simple
request? Obviously not!!!”.

The fact that the Maori Party is here because of a protest by Tariana
Turia and a hikoi of 40,000 New Zealanders tells us that Maori efforts
to be heard are not just in the past, but they are of the now Te Ururoa
Flavell said.

His goal in Parliament “is to advance the interests of all New Zealanders
in building a society in which all can live in harmony, not in spite of
the Maori presence, but because of it.

“And it is because of this that we believe our connections across
and between the distinctive cultural communities of Aotearoa are what binds
us together.

“Take for instance the concept of manaakitanga. Through manaakitanga,
we seek to ensure that the relationships we cultivate and maintain, must
be elevating and enhancing for all parties.

“Manaakitanga is about recognising the aspirations of all people
to nurture the essence of who they are.

“This is a profoundly different approach to the politics of parliament.

“I believe wholeheartedly that this country will grow, not through
denying cultural difference, but through acknowledging it, and building
on diversity as a positive way of improving our collective performance.
All that is required is mutual respect and understanding. I come
to this House to present a Maori perspective, not to put Maori ahead of
others, but to help us to stand alongside each other.

“To do so, I must first respect the contributions of others.
I acknowledge the work of the Labour Party, and recall in particular the
contribution of the late Matiu Rata, in promoting much needed reforms
in the administration of Maori land and in making a place for the Treaty
of Waitangi in law. I pay tribute to the many of the National Party
who were responsible for the first major settlements of the Treaty of
Waitangi claims albeit under a fiscal constraint.
“I appreciate the response of the Act party, in the foreshore debate.
As they could see, the issue was not about access to the beach.
The issue was about access to the Courts to establish and protect such
property interests as may be proven by legal process.

“I acknowledge as well, the presence of the Honourable Winston Peters
in this House. If there is one thing our people do admire, it is a fighter.
He has provided his support for genuine Maori initiatives.

“We respect greatly the Green Party in recognising the interests
of the indigenous people in environmental maintenance. That recognition
is universal today, as is evident in the proceedings of a number of meetings
under the banner of the United Nations, but in New Zealand, the Green
Party has helped to keep us in line with international expectations.

“Nonetheless, time has proven that Maori must have a truly independent
voice in this House if the issues that affect us are to be raised and
our rights are to be respected. It is still the case that those
rights are frequently overlooked and that some old colonial attitudes
continue to constrain Maori in the management and development of their
own affairs.

Those rights are not hard to identify. They are set out in the Draft
Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples” Te Ururoa Flavell
said.

Hone Harawira, Maori Party electorate MP for Te Tai Tokerau, told Parliament
in his first speech to it “when a reporter asked me if I thought
that the Maori Party was separatist, I said that if unity meant a continuation
of the appalling health, education, housing, mortality and prison statistics
that Maori face, then hell yes, I must be a separatist”.

Hone Harawira told
the reporter “that if, after 150 years of being governed in the
manner that we are, our customary rights, and in terms of the denial of
judicial process, even our basic human rights can be denied, then hell
yes, I must be a separatist, for only a fool could allow such destruction
to go unchallenged”.

Hone Harawira told
Parliament he was not there “to validate a parliamentary process
that denies my people the opportunities they deserve”.

“And as a Maori,
I was forced to endure the National Party bashing Maori to get votes.
I cringe at the thought that in the 21st century, anyone can be so callous
in their disregard for the rights of Maori that they would seek to betray
our citizenship to get into power” he said.

Seating in Parliament's Debating chamber
Eight political parties were elected in September 2005 to New Zealand's
48th Parliament. The seating plan reflects the parties' relationship to
each other.

The main Government party sits to the right hand of the Speaker, and the
main Opposition party, led by National party leader Don Brash, sits to
the Speaker's left. Coalition member, the Progressive Party leader and
sole Progressive member Jim Anderton, sits on the front row of the Government
benches, next to Prime Minister Helen Clark.

In this Parliament, elected under the Mixed Member Proportional (MMP)
system, Support and Opposition parties sit in the cross benches (the curved
area facing the Speaker) in places broadly reflecting their relationship
to the main Government or Opposition parties.

A new feature of the MMP system in the 48th Parliament is the seating
of two Ministers, Leader of United Future Peter Dunne and Leader of NZ
First Winston Peters, on the cross benches from which they may speak for
or against government policies other than those on which they agreed,
in the government formation negotiations, to accept collective responsibility
as ministers.

Revenue Minister
Peter Dunne, representing three United Future MPs, sits next to the main
governing party, Labour, reflecting United Future's agreement with Labour
to support it on confidence and supply votes, whilst still leaving it
free, as it has done in the past, to work with other parties (e.g. National)
who may win a majority of the votes in general election. Peter Dunne and
Winston Peters are in front row seats. Parliament's Standing orders provide
for leaders to have front row seats - and also note that leader priviledges
are for those who have six MPs. Lesser priviledges were applied, for example,
when Peter Dunne was granted only ten minutes speaking time in the November
2005 Address in Reply - whilst the leaders of partes with more than six
MPs were allocated 20 minutes.

New Zealand First
deputy Leader and Whip Peter Brown sits between Peter Dunne and Foreign
Minister Winston Peters. This seating may be interpreted as a statement
of NZ First independence from the Labour led government NZ First pledged
in 2005 to support on confidence and supply - but not on policies not
covered by their agreement.

The Green Party sits
on the Opposition side of the cross benches, next to the Maori Party,
and next to them, the ACT Party. The Green Party location reflects their
2005 agreement with the Labour Party led government to abstain on confidence
and supply votes, and their willingness to work with the government on
individual pieces of legislation.

The seating of MPs
within their party groupings reflects the ranking with their caucus. Those
members with the more senior portfolios, or party role such as party whip,
are allocated seats in or near the front row. The front row is a prime
position for speaking and responding to questions and is closer to the
party leader. Some seating reflects functional realities - e.g. the Leader
of the House is nearer to the Speaker, and the Whip (whose role includes
implementation of the strategies of the leadership) may sit just behind
the leader. Some seating reflects how close an mp is to the seat of power.

Modern parties may
diverge from some of these conventions - e.g the Maori Party's initial
seating plan provided for the co-leaders, Taria Turia and Pita Sharples
to have interchangeable seating, one in front, and in the second row.

Find
out exactly where each MP sits in Parliament's Debating Find chamber.

Find out what
MPs say in Parliament http://www.clerk.parliament.govt.nz/hansard/Hansard.aspx
The current Hansard website publishes Advance transcripts
of New Zealand Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) as they become available,
usually within 2-4 working days after debate in the House of Representatives.
After corrections have been made, a Final transcript replaces the Advance.

Under
Section 27 of the Copyright Act 1994, no copyright exists on New Zealand
Parliamentary Debates. They can be reproduced in whole or in part without
prior permission being sought.

Hansard
2003-2005 is available in a browsable HTML version, and in a
PDF printable Acrobat file You can also see lists of Hansard by year 2003
2004 2005

The
Sessional Index 2002 - 2005 (PDF) is the index of Parliamentary
Debates for the 47th Parliament, from 26 August 2002 to 2 August 2005.
(Please note that that file is 2MB in size, so may take a while to download
over a slow connection) .

Hansard 1987-2005 at the Knowledge Basket includes a
search function. Please note that the Knowledge Basket Hansard database
is restricted to subscribers.